Robert Newson writes:
>
> Everything I have testwise is at http://github.com/rnewson/couchdb-lucene
>
> I understand the reluctance to pull in the Java Virtual Machine just
> to use Lucene but, in my experience, there's no other comparable
> library for features or performance, including clucene. I'd love to
> see performance comparison numbers, though. I last benchmarked Java
> Lucene vs clucene many years ago (clucene had the edge) but that was
> pre-1.5 JVM technology. I think Java is way out in front now.
>
> B.
I hope we had some recent numbers to show as well, but taking into account
clucene has always been about 10 times faster than JL, I don't suspect the new
JVM technology would beat native code and having no GC threads.
Norman, if you get to do any performance between clucene and JL, please also
share them at our mailing list. Remember the latest JL code has its own
reader/writer improvements, hence is not really comparable with 2.3.2 (which
clucene supports).
Itamar.